Čretnik Klemen, Pleša Jernej, Kozinc Žiga, Löfler Stefan, Šarabon Nejc
Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, Izola, Slovenia.
Andrej Marušič Institute, University of Primorska, Koper, Slovenia.
Front Sports Act Living. 2022 Apr 13;4:873718. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2022.873718. eCollection 2022.
The effects of eccentric exercise (ECC) in older adults have received limited scientific attention, considering the ample evidence for its effectiveness in general and athletic populations. The purpose of this paper is to review the effects of ECC exercise modalities vs. traditional or concentric (CON) exercise on muscle strength, body composition and functional performance in older adults. Inclusion criteria regarding the age was >55 years. Three major scientific literature databases (PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science) were screened for trials comparing the effect of ECC and CON exercise programs, and 19 papers were included in the meta-analysis. ECC and CON training programs were typically matched by the duration of each session. The difference between ECC and CON was expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD). Regarding isometric knee strength, the pooled effect favored ECC (SMD = 0.50), but was not statistically significant ( = 0.160). ECC exercise elicited greater improvements in timed up and go test (SMD = -0.68; = 0.004), 2-min sit-stand test (SMD = 0.53; = 0.030) and 30-s sit-stand test (SMD = 0.81; = 0.002), but not in 6-min walking test (SMD = 0.01; = 0.960). The effects on body composition and muscle architecture were unclear (SMD = -1.44 to 1.95; = 0.060-0.689). In conclusion, our literature review indicates that ECC exercise is superior to, or at least as good as CON exercise for preserving health and overall function in older adults.
尽管有充分证据表明离心运动(ECC)在普通人群和运动员群体中具有有效性,但该运动方式对老年人的影响在科学上受到的关注有限。本文旨在综述离心运动模式与传统或向心(CON)运动相比,对老年人肌肉力量、身体成分和功能表现的影响。纳入标准为年龄>55岁。通过检索三个主要科学文献数据库(PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science)筛选比较离心运动和向心运动项目效果的试验,19篇论文纳入荟萃分析。离心运动和向心运动训练项目通常在每次训练时长上相匹配。离心运动和向心运动之间的差异用标准化均数差(SMD)表示。关于等长膝关节力量,合并效应支持离心运动(SMD = 0.50),但无统计学意义(P = 0.160)。离心运动在定时起立行走测试(SMD = -0.68;P = 0.004)、2分钟坐立测试(SMD = 0.53;P = 0.030)和30秒坐立测试(SMD = 0.81;P = 0.002)中引起更大改善,但在6分钟步行测试中未显示差异(SMD = 0.01;P = 0.960)。对身体成分和肌肉结构的影响尚不清楚(SMD = -1.44至1.95;P = 0.060 - 0.689)。总之,我们的文献综述表明,在维持老年人健康和整体功能方面,离心运动优于或至少等同于向心运动。